MAYOR REPLIES

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 173, 15 March 1932, Page 6

MAYOR REPLIES

five day scheme REASONS FOR REDUCTIONS IN RELIEF WORKERS' WAGES TREATMENT BY COMMITTEE In an interview with a "Post" representative yesterday, the ehairman of the Rotorua Unemployment Rdief | Committee, the Mayor, Mr. T. Jack- I son, replied to criticisms regarding j the administration of the committee, | which were raised at a meeting of j unemployed held on Sunday morning. ; At this meeting it was decided to forward a petition to the Minister in Charge of Unemployment, (Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates) protesting against the operation of the five-day week scheme in Rotorua, and also to withdraw the relief workers' representat've from the local committee as a protest against the attitude of the commitiee in making certain reductions in the rates paid under the No. 5 scheme. "So far as the treatment of the men by the local committee is concerned, their interests have alwnys been very carefully considered and as a result of representations wh'ch the committee has made to the Un. mploynunt Board, numerous eoncossions have been obtained which have benefited them considerably," Mr. Jackson stated. "I would like to emphasise the fact that the board's requirements in regard to every man on relief belng compelled to cultivate a gard:n before he can become eligible for unemployment have never been enforced by the local committee. Further, the committee has carred out the community garden scheme as part of the No. 5 scheme, instead of expecting the men to work the gardcn in their spare time. Committee's Work " Another thing which these men have apparently lost sight of is ti is. When No.5 .scheme Vas suspended the committee raised funds to provlde necess:ties for their families while the Borough Council provided additio/al money in ordcr to giye married n.en employment until the scheme was resumed. In addition to this, the ccmmittee has assisted the families of ..,elief workers dur'ng the past 12 months to the extent of over £200, raised by the committee as the result of various effoi'ts. It appears to me incompr^hsible that any relief worker aware of these facts should assert that the nien have been unfairly treated by the cc.nmittee." Reasons For Schextif . Exception has been taken to the concentration of the five-day week scheme upon Rotorua, Mr. Jackson stated, but there had been a definr.te reason why Rotorua had been sing'ad out for this system. The Unemployment Board had been of the opin'.on that there was an undue percentage of reeristrations in Rotorua in propor-

tion to its population, and had taken this as evidence that the travell.ng unemployed were swelling the nvmbers. It had been considered t at for some reason or other these men were gravitating on this centre r.nd the five-day scheme had be.n ini -oduced for the specifie purpose of we Uing out these men and confining the benefits of the allocation as far as possible to local men. The immediate effect of the scheme had be.n to reduce the number of registered unemployed consi Jerably, and had meant that after a period of two months, the men had been rec lying the full amount of wages in accordance with the standard oriy nally laid down. Reasons for Reductions After the expiration of two months, although the allocation had b en slightly increased until to-day it was £50 more than when the scheme was first instituted, there had been so many additional reg'strations that it had been found impossible to pay the full amount to everyone employed. Rather than adopt what was considered the unfair principle of reduclng every workcr by a similar amount regardless of individual needs, the certifymg officers had gone to a great deal of trouble to ascertain ihe exact position in each case, and had then reduced those men who wero considered to be in the best posit;on to stand the reduction. This method ensured that the most necessitcus cases received the greatest measnre of relief. The men were only r; quired to work the full five days ,-f they could not obtain private work. If they co dd get private work they were not ox pected to put in the full five days. Scope of the Reductions Prior to the establishing of the five-day scheme, the amount of the allocation available for the disti ict had necessitated the Reduction of the amounts payabl? from £2 10/-, £1 17/6 and 18/- a week for four, tlmee or two day men respectively, to £1 19/- for four day, and £1 9/8 for three day men, the two day men (i.e. the single men) having been stcod down altogether. During the p/resent week if all men registered (311 in number) wvre to be paid these maximum amouuts ment'ored, the sum necessary would be £587 1/-. As the amount av. ilable was only £450, some reduct on had obviously to be made somewhc ve This reduction had been made in cases whe^e it was cons'dered that the men wero best ab7e to afford the curtailment, by rqason of small famil'es, small rentals, or outside sources of income. There were at present. 144 menworkm"- in the borough. Of these, 52 would be pa^d in full. 29 marr'ed men with no farm'l'os hnd been reduced 2/6 a week. 38 single men bad been reduced 3/- a week, eight men had be-m reduced by 5/-, and 17 by more than 5/-. These fi games wnt to hhow that as far as nosetblo ?bo ,*edecfioT,5 1 "d b->on di«tribui-«j «v *{:'.■ rcgrw! t0 the individual c/rcumstances of each crie, and that the comm'ttee had sought to apportion the burden in an equitable manner. If any man considered that he had been unfairly treated in the matter of reductions, he had the right to lay his case in writing before the committee which would give full consideration to the facts.